SPILOTRO

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (31 total)

• Pennwalt Corp. v. Durand-Wayland, Inc., 833 F.2d 931 (Fed. Cir. 1987)
  …2d 1000, 1007-08, 214 Ct.Cl. 672, 685-86, 195 USPQ 261, 267 (1977): [E]ach and every clause of a claimed invention is considered to be material and essential. See Strumskis v. United States, 474 F. 2d 623, 627-28, 200 Ct.Cl. 668, 676, cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1067, 94 S.Ct. 576, 38 L.Ed.2d 472 (1973). Accordingly, the absence of even one element and its equivalent function of a claimed invention places the accused device outside the coverage of the claims. Strumskis v. United States, 175 USPQ 243, 246 (Ct.Cl…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Smith Int'l, Inc. v. Hughes Tool Co., 718 F.2d 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1983)
  …n the claims, literal infringement is made out. Laser Alignment, Inc. v. Woodruff & Sons, Inc., 491 F. 2d 866 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 874, 95 S.Ct. 135, 42 L.Ed.2d 113 (1974); Strumkis v. U.S., 200 Ct.Cl. 668, 474 F. 2d 623, cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1067, 94 S.Ct. 576, 38 L.Ed.2d 472, reh. denied, 414 U.S. 1147, 94 S.Ct. 902, 39 L.Ed.2d 103 (1974). Therefore, an admission of “claim coverage” is an admission of literal infringement. . The reinstatement of the Hughes counterclaim by the Ninth Circuit…
• Stelling v. Int'l Bhd. OF Elec. Workers Local Union No. 1547, 587 F.2d 1379 (9th Cir. 1978)
  …-80. In Sabolsky v. Budzanoski, 457 F. 2d 1245, 1250 n.8 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 853, 93 S.Ct. 65, 34 L.Ed.2d 96 (1972), and Pignotti v. Local # 3, Sheet Metal Workers International Association, 477 F. 2d 825, 834 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1067, 94 S.Ct. 576, 38 L.Ed.2d 472 (1973), the courts pointed to the same language in reaching their conclusion that § 501 was to be given a broad interpretation. At times in its legislative history versions of § 501 dealt solely with the fiduciary duti…

  ← 1 / 2 →